[NSFW] Anti-emotional feelers

[Vilku]

it seriously baffles me and makes me wonder if i am an infj after all, that i really, find entp's more emotional than myself.

it could perhaps be because im diagnosed with "psychotic personality" that really dulls my feelings, or maybe, as ridiculous as it sounds, i could be an intp.

are there other infj's who feel shadowed by entp's emotionality, and do you generally find entps very emotional? i do.

this would also explain why my soulmate formula isnt functiong properly, if i really am not an infj. but if i am.. oh dear, then im just a very pathetic infj.. <.<

one thing clouding my good judgment is the fact, that ive only met one enfj and one intp in my whole life so i really, really dont poses the sufficient data to make conclusions.

what do you other people think, anti-emotional feelers exist or not?

theres also the fact that i _DO_ think that feelings are the reason to live life and the only thing making it worth to live it all in the end.

and i do find myself highly empathic of other people, to the point of me suffering headaches because of other peoples emotional discomfort.

but yeah, back on topic, does anti-emotional feelers exist?

 

[subwayrider]

I've always been pretty reserved with my emotions; I at least don't become a raging beast under their influence. I don't think being a Feeler is necessarily a precursor to being outwardly emotional.

The ENTP thing might just be 'cause they're extraverts, you know.

 

[Nixie]

I don't think T or F have anything to do with emotions or intelligence. They are functions. It is the idea that, as our personality becomes defined, that we develop preferences for how we collect and express data.

collect = either sensing or intuition
express = either thinking or feeling---in other words, objective or subjective. One type observes and then internalizes data and relates the data to Self (feeling). One type observes externalized data and relates the data to the Other (thinking).

In many ways, each function is either simplified or compound. Feelers take the extra step to express things as they relate to themselves. Thinkers express things as they observe them to be without thought to how it relates to them (not 100% but it explains why some people consider them robots when the are less that realized (balanced) people). It isn't even that a person is 100% a T or an F, but rather what one's default is.

 

[barbad0s]

Feelerism has nothing to do with emotionality. T vs. F is more like a worldview. You seem to have a pretty F-ish worldview.

@HeartLess pretty much has it right, however I would refrain from using the terms "objective" and "subjective", as really in applications of these terms when they pertain to people, objectivity is really just a macro-subjectivity. I would describe it as more like T is depersonalized, while F is personalized.

ENTPs are a pretty expressive bunch for the most part. Not only do they have Ne, but that tert Fe.

 

[subwayrider]

objectivity is really just a macro-subjectivity

Word. Some people talk like there's a true objectiveness.

The funny thing about "subjective" and "objective" is that they're both pretty subjective, themselves...and objective, per your contribution.

 

[88chaz88]

I came for the NSFW, I am dissapoint.

On topic, "Feeling" does not mean emotional in MBTI terms, although the two can correlate. Feeling translates more accurately to "subjective" although even that isn't wholly correct. In short you're more likely to weigh in the moral implifications when coming to conclusions or decisions than someone who's more T dominant. This does not mean however, that you're going to burst into tears at a wedding.

Edit: I think I may also note that although this forum is more touchy-feely most of the time the INFJs I know personally are by no means flakes. They're stern, independant, sometimes aggressive, and very often jovial. Emotion comes in all forms.

 

[sassafras]

Remember: Fi suppresses, Fe expresses.

</generalizing statements>

 

[ThisIsWhoIAm]

Being more of a feeler than a thinker doesn't mean you are emotional and out of control, it just means you naturally feel through things instead of thinking through them, initially at least.

 

[Paladin-X]

"When I use the word "feeling" in contrast to "thinking," I refer to a judgment of value -- for instance, agreeable or disagreeable, good or bad, and so on. Feeling according to this definition is not an emotion (which, as the word conveys, is involuntary). Feeling as I mean it is (like thinking) a rational (i.e., ordering) function"

- Carl Jung, Man and His Symbols



With that said, I think there are emotional, emotion-lacking, and emotionless 'feelers'.

What do you mean by ENTP's emotionality?

 

[sprinkles]

This isn't entirely accurate, but is my limited understanding of T vs F

T might look at a thief who stole to feed his starving family and say that the thief must go to jail because it is consistent with the law.

F might look at the thief who stole to feed his starving family and say that we should be merciful given the situation.

i.e. it's less about 'emotional' feeling and more about feeling the situation. T wants to be impartial, consistent, and technical based while F will be more considerate, situational, and personal.

 

[sassafras]

but yeah, back on topic, does anti-emotional feelers exist?

Yes, they do exist.

What I think people NEED to understand is that Feeling and Thinking are not modes of expression, they are categories of focus. Feeling is predominantly concerned with values and relationships. If you spend most of your time contemplating interpersonal or intrapersonal significance or wondering about how to connect with other people, the universe, or yourself, chances are, you're a feeler. That does not mean you are incapable of logical thought or that mood swings are a testament to your feeler status (contrary to popular belief on the forum). It just means that you are more interested in matters from the perspective of meaning.

Thinking, on the other hand, is predominantly concerned with systems and it's dynamics. If you spend most of your time contemplating process or function or wondering how things work and why they work the way they do, chances are, you are thinker. This does not mean you are incapable of creative thinking or emotive expression (again, contrary to popular belief on the forum) however; it just means that you are more interested in matters of operation.

This does not mean that Thinkers can't be interested in sociology or that Feelers can't be interested in the hard sciences, of course. What matters is perspective and, in some cases, motivation.

The reason that feelers sometimes appear out of whack with their feelings isn't because they have more emotions than thinkers; it's usually because they're focusing on them and are being guided by subjective rules and beliefs that dictate their expression.

The same thing applies to thinkers. Thinkers sometimes appear emotionless and cold merely because their focus isn't on relationships and personal expression but rather on objective goal. However, that doesn't necessarily mean they're calm, cool and collected all the time; they can react irrationally if you violate one of their personal rules.

I hope you guys can see the inherent danger of assuming someone is a 'feeler' just because they express themselves emotionally or a 'thinker' just because they're emotionally numb. The key to determining if you're a thinker or a feeler is to pay attention to where you mind wanders the most and what about it interests you.

How you express your preferences, on the other hand, is a matter of extroversion or introversion and the personal rules you've developed based on these perspectives. This is what makes it entirely possible for a thinker to be very expressive and passionate about their favourite subject, much like it's entirely possible for a feeler to be anti-social and/or crude.

As such, I wouldn't immediately dismiss your lack of emotions as a sign that you may be a different type. Instead, I'd consider the cause of why you feel the way you do.

 

[jimtaylor]

Yes, they do exist.

What I think people NEED to understand is that Feeling and Thinking are not modes of expression, they are categories of focus. Feeling is predominantly concerned with values and relationships. If you spend most of your time contemplating interpersonal or intrapersonal significance or wondering about how to connect with other people, the universe, or yourself, chances are, you're a feeler. That does not mean you are incapable of logical thought or that mood swings are a testament to your feeler status (contrary to popular belief on the forum). It just means that you are more interested in matters from the perspective of meaning.

Thinking, on the other hand, is predominantly concerned with systems and it's dynamics. If you spend most of your time contemplating process or function or wondering how things work and why they work the way they do, chances are, you are thinker. This does not mean you are incapable of creative thinking or emotive expression (again, contrary to popular belief on the forum) however; it just means that you are more interested in matters of operation.

What if your mindset is to be concerned with the systems and dynamics within values and relationships? I'm still confuzzled. So essentially my mindset is one of exploring not just the emotional impact of values and relationships but also exploring the underlining causes and patterns associated with them. Objectively looking at the possible patterns that can predict a subjective response, either my own or anothers. Essentially understanding the statistics behind why people do what they do and then using that understanding to mitigate possible negative consequences.

 

[sassafras]

What if your mindset is to be concerned with the systems and dynamics within values and relationships? I'm still confuzzled. So essentially my mindset is one of exploring not just the emotional impact of values and relationships but also exploring the underlining causes and patterns associated with them. Objectively looking at the possible patterns that can predict a subjective response, either my own or anothers. Essentially understanding the statistics behind why people do what they do and then using that understanding to mitigate possible negative consequences.

I don't see how that could be confusing. That's still feeling. You're concerned with systems and dynamics within values and relationships because you want to predict a response from yourself or others, presumably to understand yourself or others more. You're concerned with connection..

 

[jimtaylor]

I don't see how that could be confusing. That's still feeling. You're concerned with systems and dynamics within values and relationships because you want to predict a response from yourself or others, presumably to understand yourself or others more. You're concerned with connection..

I don't know. I'm just not getting it. I can't really explain why because I don't know enough to explain in detail what I do not understand. So if the above is an example of F, what would be an example T? Because I find myself doing an equal amount of both of what you explained if I understand correctly which is a big if. I take apart and break things and try to fix them all the time. I have done the same since I was little with Legos. I like knowing how things work, just to know and I think it's fun. I like finding patterns, whether they are people or things.

I work with numbers and risk in regards to people and organizations. I can focus in on patterns in how they relate at a micro level like family and friends or look at a macro level in seeing how entire populations should be measured to find the best outcome(social, economic, environmental). I know that certain people are more at risk for certain things. Like an obese person is at a higher risk for heart disease. I dont know anything else and I dont really care about the person as a person as all i know is that the person is 400 pounds. Ok, well why are they at a higher risk? Ok, now I know why they are at a higher risk, so now what causes someone to become obese? Genetic factors, personality, environment, etc... Yes I know the one factor and that is that this person is 400 pounds and so has an increased risk for heart disease but what other risk factors could they have because of what caused them to be 400 pounds?

Is this still F? Because probably 3/4 of my time is spent in a mode like this while the other 1/4 is spent thinking in a mode of my relationships and role in the world and the moral implications of X and Y.

 

[sassafras]

I don't know. I'm just not getting it. I can't really explain why because I don't know enough to explain in detail what I do not understand. So if the above is an example of F, what would be an example T? Because I find myself doing an equal amount of both of what you explained if I understand correctly which is a big if. I take apart and break things and try to fix them all the time. I have done the same since I was little with Legos. I like knowing how things work, just to know and I think it's fun. I like finding patterns, whether they are people or things.

I work with numbers and risk in regards to people and organizations. I can focus in on patterns in how they relate at a micro level like family and friends or look at a macro level in seeing how entire populations should be measured to find the best outcome(social, economic, environmental). I know that certain people are more at risk for certain things. Like an obese person is at a higher risk for heart disease. I dont know anything else and I dont really care about the person as a person as all i know is that the person is 400 pounds. Ok, well why are they at a higher risk? Ok, now I know why they are at a higher risk, so now what causes someone to become obese? Genetic factors, personality, environment, etc... Yes I know the one factor and that is that this person is 400 pounds and so has an increased risk for heart disease but what other risk factors could they have because of what caused them to be 400 pounds?

Is this still F? Because probably 3/4 of my time is spent in a mode like this while the other 1/4 is spent thinking in a mode of my relationships and role in the world and the moral implications of X and Y.

I'm afraid I don't understand what you're asking here, Jim. You're describing your job to me, which you probably do 3/4 of the day because you're being paid to do it. What would you do in your spare time? Are you suggesting that you understand that people who are F's are incapable of being interested in or working in a field of finance or the hard sciences? Because compartmentalizing T and F types this way was certainly not the point of my post. In fact, it was the exact opposite.

Please keep in mind that you are not just your dominant judging function. You are a whole person and you do have other functions in your employ. The key to finding your type is to find out which one you're most comfortable using and which one is your 'default' for your world view and the first one you turn to when problem solving.

 

[jimtaylor]

I'm afraid I don't understand what you're asking here, Jim. You're describing your job to me, which you probably do 3/4 of the day because you're being paid to do it. What would you do in your spare time? Are you suggesting that you understand that people who are F's are incapable of being interested in or working in a field of finance or the hard sciences? Because compartmentalizing T and F types this way was certainly not the point of my post. In fact, it was the exact opposite.

Please keep in mind that you are not just your dominant judging function. You are a whole person and you do have other functions in your employ. The key to finding your type is to find out which one you're most comfortable using and which one is your 'default' for your world view and the first one you turn to when problem solving.

No no I'm just trying to understand the difference between the two and I went with an experince I can most easily relate to or understand. Just trying to make sense of it.

edit: See, if I spend most of my life acting one way, am I not that way? I have been a certain way through my entire academic career and through my working career and its similar to the experience outlined above. I have done it so much since I was little that it is now natural though it wasn't when I was a child.

So my default for problem solving is so gray area, I guess it's hard to figure out which one I go into first. It's gotten to the point that it's almost simultaneous. When dealing with a problem close to home I deal with both. It's hard to pinpoint exactly which process I prefer because its not obvious as I do both; from my understanding, pretty equally.

I know T's are not mathematical zombie virgins and F's are not wild emotional train wrecks. I just don't recognize a strong preference for either in myself. Like I know without a shadow of a doubt that I am Introverted. I don't lack social skills but I do like my quiet time and quiet reflection. I can be sociable when I need to be but it's not my preference. With T and F I don't feel that strongly to either one. That's why I am asking. I am trying to get a simple picture of the differences between how the two operate by relating it to something tangible and not just theory.